<?php
/**
 * <https://y.st./>
 * Copyright © 2018 Alex Yst <mailto:copyright@y.st>
 * 
 * This program is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
 * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
 * the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or
 * (at your option) any later version.
 * 
 * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
 * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
 * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
 * GNU General Public License for more details.
 * 
 * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
 * along with this program. If not, see <https://www.gnu.org./licenses/>.
**/

$xhtml = array(
	'<{title}>' => 'Male genital mutilation',
	'<{subtitle}>' => 'Written in <span title="Introduction to Philosophy">PHIL 1402</span> by <a href="https://y.st./">Alexand(er|ra) Yst</a>, finalised on 2018-07-25',
	'<{copyright year}>' => '2018',
	'takedown' => '2017-11-01',
	'<{body}>' => <<<END
<h2>Introduction</h2>
<p>
	One of the available topics for the essay this week is the ethics of forcing adult beliefs on children that haven&apos;t chosen these beliefs yet.
	This is ... a bit of a difficult topic to address.
	Al beliefs held by adults could be viewed this way.
	Religion, a desire to follow the law, general kindness to one another, et cetera.
	In regards to religion, Bill Nye once said it was okay for parents to believe in creationism, but that they shouldn&apos;t teach their children to do the same.
	We need future scientists and engineers, not people that believe in mythology that contradicts the facts (Nye, 2012).
	As someone that believes in evolution, I understand his plight.
	However, if he&apos;s worried about contradiction, what about the contradiction of wanting people to teach their child something they don&apos;t even believe in themselves?
	If parents don&apos;t believe in evolution, of <strong>*course*</strong> they&apos;re going to try to teach their children to hold the same disbelief!
	In many cases, there&apos;s no good way to draw a line between beliefs that children shouldn&apos;t be subjected to and truths that need to be passed on.
	There&apos;s one place we can definitely draw the line though: bodily mutilation.
	If taught something, children can later decide that what they were taught was wrong.
	However, when people subject their children to bodily mutilation, that mutilation cannot be undone if children later decide the mutilation is unwanted.
</p>
<p>
	The example given by the assignment instructions of an example of adult beliefs forced on children was that of female genital mutilation.
	In some cultures, it&apos;s common practice to mutilate female children&apos;s genitals at birth.
	Obviously, this is wrong.
	However, there&apos;s no need for me to discuss this.
	It&apos;s already common to reject such terrible treatment of female babies.
	It&apos;s even become illegal to engage in this practice.
	However, what about <strong>*male*</strong> human babies?
	Another common practice, albeit in different cultures, is the practice of mutilating male children&apos;s reproductive organs at birth, without these children&apos;s consent.
	After all, like the female babies, these male babies are too young to even know what&apos;s going on, let alone be proficient in language and try to put a stop to it.
	This unnecessary and irreversible operation is known as circumcision.
	Like with female genital mutilation, male genital mutilation is a cultural, often religious practice; one practised by Christians, Jews, and Muslims mainly.
	However, male babies don&apos;t have the same protection under the law that female babies do.
	My guess is that the reason female genital mutilation was specifically mentioned in the assignment instructions while male genital mutilation wasn&apos;t despite male genital mutilation being more prevalent in the world is because this course is Christian-oriented, and it&apos;s a very common Christian, Jewish, and Muslim practice, while female genital mutilation is not.
</p>
<h2>Male genital mutilation</h2>
<p>
	We always hear about female circumcision, now more commonly known as female genital mutilation, but male genital mutilation, still known as circumcision by most, is actually a much more common practice.
	The male foreskin is actually full of sensitive nerve endings.
	Removing it desensitizes the male sexually.
	In what way is that a good thing?
	These days, it&apos;s a cultural practice and the intent doesn&apos;t include reducing sexual enjoyment, but the cultural practice started with deliberate intent.
	Even without that intent still lingering, the harm caused by the operation still persists.
</p>
<p>
	Cutting off the foreskin actually makes sex less enjoyable once the male comes of age and becomes sexually active.
	In fact, this was the very reason the practice got started (Blair, 2013)!
	In other words, male circumcision serves the same purpose as female circumcision.
	It&apos;s an often-religious practice used to lessen sexual desire and pleasure, and actually serves no valid medical purpose.
	The entire point is to reduce sexual desire, including but not limited to the desire to masturbate.
	By having this operation performed on your child, you are preventing him from ever experiencing sex to its fullest.
	You are permanently taking away part of one of life&apos;s greatest pleasures.
	You don&apos;t do that to someone you actually love.
	For the love of your child, just say &quot;no&quot; to circumcision!
</p>
<p>
	If an adult wants to undergo the circumcision surgery, that&apos;s fine; adults actually have a choice.
	Circumcision isn&apos;t the problem; forced circumcision on people that have no say in the matter is the issue.
	In fact, due to infants having not built up their immune system yet, circumcision of infants is much more likely to lead to complications from infection, up to and including death.
	It&apos;s safer to wait until adulthood.
	Infants have no choice in the matter, either.
	By choosing circumcision, you&apos;re choosing to do irreversible damage to your child&apos;s sex organs without their consent.
</p>
<h2>Infant deaths</h2>
<p>
	Do you care if your male child lives or dies?
	Normally, circumcision won&apos;t result in death.
	However, just about every new parent is concerned with the possibility of $a[SIDS] (sudden infant death syndrome).
	$a[SIDS] is statistically <strong>*less likely*</strong> to kill your child than complications arising from circumcision surgery.
	If you&apos;re worried about something as uncommon as $a[SIDS], why would you be less worried about a more likely and <strong>*much*</strong> more preventable cause of death?
	As Blair says, <q cite="https://thedailybanter.com/issues/2013/06/21/the-cruelest-cut-of-all-why-male-circumcision-is-wrong/">1 in every 77 deaths in neonatals was a direct result of a circumcision, compared to 1 in every 115 deaths from Sudden Infant Death Syndrome</q> (Blair, 2013).
</p>
<h2>Hygiene</h2>
<p>
	One excuse people use to justify male genital mutilation is hygiene.
	They claim that if the foreskin is missing, dirt and germs can&apos;t be caught under it.
	Obviously though, the solution is to wash it, not remove it.
	As Blair put it, you don&apos;t have a foreskin hygiene issue if there is no foreskin, just like Oscar Pistorius never has issues twisting his ankle during a track meet (Blair, 2013).
	So who is this Oscar Pistorius, and why does he never twist his ankles?
	Well, I looked him up.
	It seems Oscar Pistorius has no ankles, and uses prosthetics to get around (Wikipedia, 2018).
	He even uses them well enough to compete in the track events mentioned by Blair.
	So we&apos;re cutting off part of the male sexual organ and preventing males form experiencing sex to its fullest pleasure, just so said males can be lazy and not have to wash under the foreskin.
	Should we also cut off their feet so they never have to deal with ankle injuries!?
	Obviously hygiene isn&apos;t actually a reasonable excuse for this mutilation.
</p>
<h2>Male versus female genital mutilation</h2>
<p>
	Many people would be quick to point out that male circumcision is less extreme than female circumcision.
	If both serve the same purpose, that is, to dampen sexual desire and pleasure, why is male genital mutilation typically less extreme than female genital mutilation?
	I theorise that it has to do with reproductive function.
	A female can still reproduce without any sexual desire or pleasure.
	For males, this isn&apos;t the case.
	When male circumcision was first performed, it was necessary to leave some of the sensitive tissues intact: the glans.
	Otherwise, the male couldn&apos;t reproduce later in life and the family would de out.
	The end of the family bloodline wasn&apos;t the goal, so male genital mutilation necessarily needed to be made less extreme.
	That doesn&apos;t make male genital mutilation of infants a morally acceptable thing.
</p>
<h2>The $a[HPV] myth</h2>
<p>
	Past research claimed there was a link between circumcised males and the spreading of $a[HPV].
	$a[HPV] is a known cause of cancer, both in the male penis and in the female cervix.
	However, modern research found more cases of $a[HPV] in <strong>*circumcised*</strong> males.
	According to this newer study, circumcision may <strong>*double*</strong> the risk of contracting and spreading $a[HPV] (Healio, 2017)!
	Before we jump the gun and claim circumcision necessarily is increasing the spread of this carcinogenic virus, I think it&apos;s worth noting that circumcision is likely not the only variable at work here.
	Whether circumcision increases or decreases the likelihood of spreading disese, one thing is very clear: circumcision alone isn&apos;t suitable for stopping the spread of $a[HPV].
	One should always use a condom.
	Condoms are scientifically proven to be highly effective at preventing the spread of most $a[STI]s, including but not limited to $a[HPV].
	No male genital mutilation is necessary for making condoms effective, either.
</p>
<p>
	Still not convinced circumcision isn&apos;t effective against $a[HPV]?
	Well, it doesn&apos;t matter.
	As a parent, it&apos;s not your choice to make.
	You shouldn&apos;t be forcing your way on the bodies of infants.
	It shouldn&apos;t be up to the parents to make this decision.
	It should be up to their male children (once they&apos;ve grown up) and their partners.
	You shouldn&apos;t cut away at your child&apos;s body without their ability to understand what&apos;s going on and without their consent.
	I&apos;m not arguing that circumcision of adults is wrong.
	I&apos;m arguing that circumcision of infants without their consent is wrong.
</p>
<h2>Conclusion</h2>
<p>
	As we all know, female genital mutilation is wrong.
	As we all <strong>*should*</strong> know, male genital mutilation is equally wrong.
	No matter the sex of the child, circumcision cuts away some of the most sensitive and nerve-filled tissue from your child&apos;s sex organs.
	This loss of important sexual tissue prevents your child from ever experiencing the fullest pleasure they would otherwise get from sex.
	Yes, sex can still feel good, but it won&apos;t feel nearly <strong>*as*</strong> good.
	Do you really want to deprive your child of that?
	And if yes, can you honestly say you actually love your child?
	As a parent, it&apos;s not your choice to make, because it&apos;s not your body being mutilated.
	Let your children grow up and choose for themselves.
</p>
<div class="APA_references">
	<h2>References:</h2>
	<p>
		Blair, E. A. (2013, June 21). The Cruelest Cut of All: Why Male Circumcision is Wrong - The Daily Banter. Retrieved from <a href="https://thedailybanter.com/issues/2013/06/21/the-cruelest-cut-of-all-why-male-circumcision-is-wrong/"><code>https://thedailybanter.com/issues/2013/06/21/the-cruelest-cut-of-all-why-male-circumcision-is-wrong/</code></a>
	</p>
	<p>
		Healio. (2017, May 22). Circumcised men at twice the risk for cancer-causing HPV, study shows. Retrieved from <a href="https://www.healio.com/infectious-disease/stds/news/online/%7Bee2769c4-b9b0-4daa-8eef-943c7205ed6c%7D/circumcised-men-at-twice-the-risk-for-cancer-causing-hpv-study-shows"><code>https://www.healio.com/infectious-disease/stds/news/online/%7Bee2769c4-b9b0-4daa-8eef-943c7205ed6c%7D/circumcised-men-at-twice-the-risk-for-cancer-causing-hpv-study-shows</code></a>
	</p>
	<p>
		Nye, B. (2012, August 23). Bill Nye: Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children - YouTube. Retrieved from <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHbYJfwFgOU"><code>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHbYJfwFgOU</code></a>
	</p>
	<p>
		Wikipedia. (2018, July 21). Oscar Pistorius - Wikipedia. Retrieved from <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oscar_Pistorius"><code>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oscar_Pistorius</code></a>
	</p>
</div>
END
);
